RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01248
INDEX CODE: 112.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His current enlistment contract of 27 Apr 07 be declared void and he be
allowed to execute a reenlistment under his new Air Force Specialty Code
(AFSC) of 1A731 (Aerial Gunner).
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
While attending the Basic Aerial Gunner (BAG) course at Kirtland AFB, he
was pulled from class and told to reenlist because he did not have
sufficient retainability and unless he reenlisted before graduation day he
would not be allowed to continue the course. He was required to sign
reenlistment documents days before he was eligible for a $60,000 Selective
Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). His reenlistment was rushed and forced through
the system with complete disregard to regulations and without the required
authorization.
In support of his request, applicant provides copies of documents
associated with his retraining application, copies of his Certificates of
Training and an excerpt of AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States
Air Force. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
__________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Information extracted from the Military Personnel Data System indicates the
applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date as 5 Mar 02. He is
currently serving on active duty in the grade of staff sergeant, having
assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jul 06.
On 27 Apr 07, the applicant, who had an established date of separation
(DOS) of 4 Nov 07, reenlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of 4
years, thereby establishing a new DOS of 26 Oct 11.
__________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the schoolhouse noted the
applicant did not have sufficient retainability for the BAG course.
Subsequently, he was directed to obtain the retainability or be eliminated
from the course. To meet retainability requirements and to complete the
training, the applicant reenlisted on 27 Apr 07 in his previous AFSC of
4A151. DPSOA reviewed the applicant's records and noted the applicant had
already utilized his extensions available and could only reenlist. These
extensions executed on 25 Sep 03 for 10 months to qualify for an overseas
assignment and one executed on 11 Oct 05 for 20 months to qualify for an
assignment exceeded the Air Force policy of 23 months for first term
airmen. Therefore, when approved for retraining, the applicant had already
utilized his extensions available and could only reenlist. The complete
AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit B.
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9 May
08 for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, this office
has received no response.
__________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice warranting favorable consideration of the
applicant's request. Evidence has not been provided which would lead us to
believe that the rules of the applicable instructions were inappropriately
applied in this case or that he was denied rights and benefits to which he
was entitled. The applicant contends his reenlistment was rushed and
forced through the system with complete disregard to regulations days
before he was eligible for an SRB. However, we did not find an error or
injustice in establishing the requirement that he obtain the appropriate
retainability. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we
find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
__________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was
denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be
reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not
considered with this application.
__________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-01248
in Executive Session on 17 Jun 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Panel Chair
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
Ms. Barbara J. Barger, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2008-
01248 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Apr 08, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 21 Apr 08.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 May 08.
JAY H. JORDAN
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00390
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00390 INDEX CODE: 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be authorized a Zone B, Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). He enlisted in the Air Force on 15 May 01 for a period of four years. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03802
According to AF Form 1411, Extension or Cancellation of Extension of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force, on 17 Mar 04, the applicant extended his 3 May 00 enlistment for 18 months for the purpose of having sufficient retainability for Career Airmen Reenlistment Reservation System (CAREERS) retraining into Air Field Management (AFSC 1C7X1). As pointed out by HQ USAF/JAA, the applicant is “better off” with the existing 17-month extension plus a four-year reenlistment, with a four-year SRB,...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05607
He was miscounseled when not told that he must reenlist before entering an extension, as well as, the 23 month extension was obligated service which would prevent him from reenlisting at a later time due to his high year tenure. On 31 March 2011, the applicants commander recommended approval of his request and his date of separation of 28 August 2012 was extended to 28 July 2014. While the applicant contends he was not offered the option to reenlist in March 2011 for the purpose of...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02749
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. On 29 Aug 06, the AFCC advised the applicant he met the qualifications for retraining into all of his requested AFSCs; that he would receive a separate email identifying...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02961
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After completing the Return to Duty Program (RTDP) and being accepted back into the Air Force, he is now being denied the opportunity to reenlist, which he believes is unjust. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant’s available military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 4 Dec 01 in the grade of airman basic. A...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00485
However, after meeting the requirements of his contract and submitting his request for the bonus through his Military Personnel Flight (MPF), the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) denied his request and would not honor his contract citing that in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2606, he was not entitled to receive a bonus even though his contract stated he was. He should receive the SRB indicated in his reenlistment contract even though the Air Force is denying payment due to their...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02904
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02904 INDEX CODE: 128.05 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment contract be changed to reflect the 1A131, Flight Engineer Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) so he can qualify for a Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). To meet retainability requirements and complete the...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00464
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00474 INDEX: 112.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Home of Record (HOR) be changed from Brunswick, Ohio to Carter, South Dakota. DPSOA states the HOR is defined as the place recorded as the home of the individual at the time when enlisted, commissioned, appointed, inducted or...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05612
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. However, that extension or reenlistment in Aug 2012 still would not have made the applicant eligible for the SRB because member's have to be a 3-skill level in the SRB career field at the time...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00122
His Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) is 3P0X1 Security Forces. According to records on file with Air Force Retraining, the applicant was number 1 out of 180 (involuntary phase) SSgts identified as vulnerable for involuntary retraining into 180 quotas. The applicant was aware of the program requirements, but failed to submit the application as required and instructed.